Saturday, September 23, 2017

Tribalism and the American Civil Religion

By Rudy Barnes, Jr.

Tribalism
is the human tendency to relate to a group of like-minded people in politics
and religion. The centrifugal force of American
politics has created a partisan duopoly of extremes on the left and right,
leaving political moderates with nowhere to go.
American religions are also tribal, but they are not bipolar. There is a wide diversity in the many American
religious beliefs.

Michael
Gerson has questioned the prevalent view that America’s bipolar politics are immutable. Americans could avoid partisan extremes by choosing
multi-party politics like those of European parliaments; but Americans have
chosen to limit their politics to one of two choices. It’s the good guys (us) versus the bad guys
(them)—the red team versus the blue team.
Politics are like sports in America: There’s a winner and a loser, and nothing
in between.

But
political issues are seldom black and white.
There are shades of grey—a third way—in almost all critical issues,
especially those that lead to war. In hindsight
the Vietnam and Iraq wars were mistakes, and the U.S. Civil War was probably
America’s worst mistake. Slavery in the
U.S. could have been eliminated without that terrible war, and preservation of
the union was not a sufficient justification for the 600,000 casualties of that
awful American tragedy.

Gerson
speaks of “…the dangerous triumph of cultural identification over unifying
political ideals” and asks, “Who is at fault for this mental divide?” Gerson speaks of needing the spirit of
Abraham Lincoln for “mutual forgiveness” and “genuine reconciliation.” But in 1860 Lincoln and southern fire-eaters
polarized America and led it into its most destructive war.

Both
sides bear responsibility for that great American tragedy. The voices of reason and options short of war
were ignored by the bipolar political tribalism of that day. Since then America has continued to limit its
political choices to just two partisan alternatives, an overly simplistic
approach that has produced extremist politics; but it doesn’t have to continue.

Multiple
parties could moderate our polarized two-party duopoly, as in parliamentary
systems. But Americans don’t seem
willing to consider sensible alternatives to bipolar tribalism in politics. In the polarized 2016 election, Americans rejected
third-party candidates in favor of either a Republican or Democrat. And they deserved what they got.

Gerson
asks: Who is at fault for our bipolar
tribalism? The answer is: We are.
As Pogo observed, We have met the
enemy and it is us. In a democracy
we cannot escape responsibility for our political decisions, and any politics
of reconciliation to remedy our bipolar tribalism will require ending our
two-party duopoly—and that doesn’t seem likely anytime soon.

The religious half of the American civil religion is also
tribal, but it’s not bipolar. That’s
because American religions have diffused into numerous sects. And an increasing number of believers have disowned
religion as nones to practice a more
individualized “spirituality.” While Inus
Younis considers individualized spirituality an interim phase that leads to religious
affiliation, there is no evidence that nones
are returning to institutional religion.

Tribalism
defines American politics and religion, and our polarized two-party politics can
take a lesson from our diffused religions.
Good religion and politics require independent and critical thinking and
a commitment to provide for the common good, and both should be based on the greatest commandment to love God and
to love our neighbors—including our neighbors of other races and religions—as we
love ourselves.

That’s
a common word of faith of Jews,
Christians and Muslims alike, and it can defuse polarized tribalism in the
American civil religion and promote a politics of reconciliation.